Mad Men 6/16 The Quality of Mercy

I didn't get that either. Pete had just called Manolo a "degenerate" when Bob hinted that Manolo was not interested in women, so I can't see how Bob would then read that as thinking he had a chance with Pete. I was totally confused by that scene. Although I did take it to mean that Bob was explaining that Manolo was Bob's lover and that Manolo had been Bob's nurse/provider and Bob had developed his feelings for Manolo due to how well Manolo took care of him. What I didn't understand was Bob seemingly making a pass at Pete by touching knees.

Click to expand...

I don't think Manolo was ever Bob's nurse. Didn't Bob say he was his father's nurse (or another relative). Or maybe that was just a lie and Manolo is just Bob's lover. Or maybe Manolo was the nurse of whomever Bob took care of at his last job (didn't they call him a manservant?).

Yes, Sal was fired but it wasn't because he was gay. It was because their biggest client, Lee Garner Jr. of Lucky Strike was gay and had made a pass at Sal. Sal turned him down and Lee Garner Jr. was humiliated, so he forced Roger to can Sal.

Click to expand...

True. But I think at least a little of that can be attributed to at least Don being a little bit disgusted at Sal when he discovered him in that hotel room with the bellhop.

I don't think Don or Roger felt the least bit guilty getting rid of a homosexual from their office.

From the firm's standpoint, all true. From a client standpoint? I'm not so sure. I know it's a different time, but in my line of work, very often a client coming on board will request the CVs of those working on the team. Maybe in the 1960s this wasn't a regular occurrence. I'm not sure (and yes, I know, it's a TV show, and it all probably doesn't matter). If Bob is found out by a client, couldn't that mean trouble for the firm. Don at least has a reputation in the business. Other companies know who he is.

The thing about Bob is, we STILL don't know what his motivation is. Is he just one of those people who bounce around from job to job pretending to be someone else and once found out, he just skips town and does it again? Or is he some sort of grifter with some ulterior motive that's going to come back and bite someone on the butt. Since there's one more season, I kind of feel that Bob is going to play a pivotal role in how the series ends.

Click to expand...

What kinds of qualifications are required to be an effective accounts man? You have to be charming. You have to be able to please the client. You have to be good at navigating interoffice politics. Bob has all of those in spades. What is not required (from the client's standpoint) is a fancy degree from a prestigious university, or a blue-blood upbringing. So while Bob may have relied on some of those things in order to get his foot in the door at SC&P, they're not what's going to keep him there, and they certainly shouldn't matter to the client. Bob will be a better, more attentive account man than anyone else at SC&P could even dream of being, so from the client's standpoint, they should be thrilled.

What kinds of qualifications are required to be an effective accounts man? You have to be charming. You have to be able to please the client. You have to be good at navigating interoffice politics. Bob has all of those in spades. What is not required (from the client's standpoint) is a fancy degree from a prestigious university, or a blue-blood upbringing. So while Bob may have relied on some of those things in order to get his foot in the door at SC&P, they're not what's going to keep him there, and they certainly shouldn't matter to the client. Bob will be a better, more attentive account man than anyone else at SC&P could even dream of being, so from the client's standpoint, they should be thrilled.

Click to expand...

I would imagine today, you probably need a degree in marketing to get your foot in the door at a major ad agency. Either that, or lots of experience in the company and probably a list of other clients you worked with. Does Bob have ANY of that? In those days, I am sure the degree wasn't important. But the experience would be for a major client like GM. It makes great TV to show it this way, but I bet the reality of the situation was quite different. Maybe I'm wrong.

I am head of my department, in charge of a very highly specialized, extremely technical position in my industry. Just 25 years ago, in the late 80's, I found the job on a bulletin board, and they hired me on my first interview. I had absolutely no education or training in the industry at all. ETA: Today, we won't even interview someone without a minimum of a 4-year degree in the field.

I know nothing about the advertising field, but assuming there are actually people in Bob Benson's position in that industry, I would be willing to bet that 45 years ago in the 60's, if you could talk the talk and get the job done effectively, nobody would think twice about your credentials.

I am head of my department, in charge of a very highly specialized, extremely technical position in my industry. Just 25 years ago, in the late 80's, I found the job on a bulletin board, and they hired me on my first interview. I had absolutely no education or training in the industry at all. ETA: Today, we won't even interview someone without a minimum of a 4-year degree in the field.

I know nothing about the advertising field, but assuming there are actually people in Bob Benson's position in that industry, I would be willing to bet that 45 years ago in the 60's, if you could talk the talk and get the job done effectively, nobody would think twice about your credentials.

Click to expand...

I guess we work in different areas. I've never had a professional job where someone didn't interview me with my resume sitting on their desk next to them. Now within the same company, that's different. I've been in a situation where our company was going after a LARGE (Fortune 500) client and they requested CVs from EVERYONE who they might deal with at the company. And we were a small software firm. We've even had auditors request CVs to make sure that those working on the projects had the credentials to do the work. Now, from Sterling Cooper's standpoint, they might not care. From GM, the largest company on the planet at that time, I would think they would want some proof that they are who they say they are. Not to mention I'd want their most experienced person on it. Bob meets none of that.

But anyway, this has been beaten to death. It's a TV show, and it makes good TV to have it the way it is. That's all that matters. I STILL want to know what Bob's MO is. During his phone call to Manolo (we assume, it was in Spanish) he said something like "He's making it very difficult for me (or it might have been us)". Making WHAT difficult? I think Bob is going to pull something and screw the firm.

<rant>
I think today that people are just lazy and use college degrees as an easy discriminator to substantially prune the application pool. I was a mathematics major in college and have never used any of it or for that matter any of the other classes I took. Most of what I used on my job I learned on the side doing my own thing. Most of the computer people I know learned on the side. I am generally more impressed by people who learned thing on their own versus cookie cutter classes that many of us took.
</rant>

<rant>
I think today that people are just lazy and use college degrees as an easy discriminator to substantially prune the application pool. I was a mathematics major in college and have never used any of it or for that matter any of the other classes I took. Most of what I used on my job I learned on the side doing my own thing. Most of the computer people I know learned on the side. I am generally more impressed by people who learned thing on their own versus cookie cutter classes that many of us took.
</rant>

Click to expand...

I agree. I was a business major. Now I do project work in IT. But that said, there is so much corporate structure, and HUGE HR departments that it's next to impossible to hire someone from outside the company without vetting their credentials. It just doesn't happen much anymore. Even Doghows example is rare these days. Twenty-Five years ago, IT was still fairly new. When I got my first job in IT, I didn't have those credentials, but, I did know a lot of stuff that impressed the interviewers in a SMALL company. I had interviewed for similar jobs at bigger companies and didn't get the job. Not enough experience or credentials. I think it's hard to get in to a new company at the bottom without the education. Once you have experience, it's a lot easier. That said, in Bob's case, he had neither the experience or the credentials. What he did have was the ability to brown nose. In 1960s corporate American, I guess that was good enough.

I think the ease with which we can check credentials today has made it common for companies to do this. But in 1968, checking credentials took a lot of leg work. The only reason Duck did it, is because he was being paid to do it. For GM, they've just hired an ad agency based on the creative work that was pitched and they're confidence that the ad agency can deliver a product that will help sell their cars. They realize that they hired a firm from out of town and therefore they're not going to get their most senior accounts person to leave the firm's HQ and move full-time to Detroit. They realize that the person on the ground in Detroit will be a junior person maintaining the account and keeping the client happy while the creative team in NYC works on the product. So I don't think GM in 1968 would have any reason to check on the credentials of their ad agency's account man. The ad agency would stand to lose a lot more than GM would if they put someone ill-suited into that position. What does GM care as long as SC&P trusts the person and as long as GM's needs are being met?

I think the ease with which we can check credentials today has made it common for companies to do this. But in 1968, checking credentials took a lot of leg work. The only reason Duck did it, is because he was being paid to do it. For GM, they've just hired an ad agency based on the creative work that was pitched and they're confidence that the ad agency can deliver a product that will help sell their cars. They realize that they hired a firm from out of town and therefore they're not going to get their most senior accounts person to leave the firm's HQ and move full-time to Detroit. They realize that the person on the ground in Detroit will be a junior person maintaining the account and keeping the client happy while the creative team in NYC works on the product. So I don't think GM in 1968 would have any reason to check on the credentials of their ad agency's account man. The ad agency would stand to lose a lot more than GM would if they put someone ill-suited into that position. What does GM care as long as SC&P trusts the person and as long as GM's needs are being met?

But his fraud was to SC&P, not GM. We don't know what SC&P told GM about him. As far as GM is concerned, he's a charming guy who makes sure their needs are met. So if it's exposed that Bob's background is not what he claimed when he was hired by SCDP, then that's an issue SC&P will have to deal with, but I don't think it will concern GM. They'd still be getting the services they expect and require from Bob, regardless of his education or upbringing. And frankly, if Bob ingratiates himself to the client, it could protect him from the firm doing anything to remove him from the account. Just as Pete couldn't talk the other partners out of removing Bob from the account in this episode because Bob's charms have put a spell on them, we can only presume the same thing will happen with the GM execs.

I never really thought about it, but here's Pete in a job with the major requirement being a good personality and getting along well with others. His personality sucks! Nobody who knows him, likes him--mother and wife included.

I never really thought about it, but here's Pete in a job with the major requirement being a good personality and getting along well with others. His personality sucks! Nobody who knows him, likes him--mother and wife included.

Click to expand...

I think he was fine in the beginning. He was a good schmoozer but kept trying to overthrow Don's authority and you can't do that.

Back to the Ocean Spray deal -- my take was Don saving the entire account by lying that it was Frank's last idea...he saves the whole deal and OS then actually upped their limit by 10K. I personally think the ad idea was average at best (I worked in marketing and PR for 20 years)....Don realized the idea was just OK, OS threatens to dump it unless they do it for the agreed cost (15K), and, if they don't, there would be no deal at all. So Don pulls this out of his ass and saves the day actually increasing accounts receivable....

Back to the Ocean Spray deal -- my take was Don saving the entire account by lying that it was Frank's last idea...he saves the whole deal and OS then actually upped their limit by 10K. I personally think the ad idea was average at best (I worked in marketing and PR for 20 years)....Don realized the idea was just OK, OS threatens to dump it unless they do it for the agreed cost (15K), and, if they don't, there would be no deal at all. So Don pulls this out of his ass and saves the day actually increasing accounts receivable....

Click to expand...

That was the baby aspirin deal with Johnson & Johnson, not the cranberry people.

The 10k bump was substantial as it was a 66% increase to $25k from $15k.
Too bad for Peggy not getting credit, but even if it was the next Plop Plop Fizz Fizz it was 2+ times as much as the customer said they wanted to pay, she didn't keep the idea within the set budget.

Back to the Ocean Spray deal -- my take was Don saving the entire account by lying that it was Frank's last idea...he saves the whole deal and OS then actually upped their limit by 10K. I personally think the ad idea was average at best (I worked in marketing and PR for 20 years)....Don realized the idea was just OK, OS threatens to dump it unless they do it for the agreed cost (15K), and, if they don't, there would be no deal at all. So Don pulls this out of his ass and saves the day actually increasing accounts receivable....

Click to expand...

I don't think that money was direct billings that the firm was going to be able to collect. What they were talking about was the cost of residuals that would be owed to the actors every time the ad airs. The original idea of the ad had a whole group of actors in it and Joan said there was easily $50k in residuals there. So now with the limit of $25k, they're either going to have to find cheaper actors or do the commercial with fewer actors, which, according to the way Ted and Peggy described it, would eliminate that claustrophobic feeling they were going for.